“Our enemies are innovative and resourceful, and so are we. They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we.” - George W. Bush

Friday, August 29, 2014

NATO's outgoing secretary general is repeating his call for member countries like Canada to boost their defence spending in response to the "wake-up call" of recent crises like the one unfolding in Ukraine

WHY CANADA?

Putin likens Ukraine’s forces to Nazis and threatens standoff in the Arctic

Russian president hits back at invasion accusations as Nato accuses Kremlin of ‘blatant violation' of Ukraine's sovereignty

The Russian president, Vladimir Putin, has hit back at accusations that he has effectively invaded Ukraine, accusing Kiev's forces of behaving like Nazis in the conflict in the east and ominously threatening to take his standoff with the west into the disputed Arctic.

He added that Russians and Ukrainians "are practically one people", reprising a theme of an earlier statement in which he referred to the disputed areas of south-eastern Ukraine as Novorossiya, harking back to tsarist times, when the area was ruled from Moscow.

He answered questions from young supporters, some waving banners bearing his face, at a pro-Kremlin youth camp on the shores of a lake. He looked relaxed but his tone grew intense as he spoke of Russia's military might, reminding the crowd that Russia was a strong nuclear power. "Russia's partners … should understand it's best not to mess with us," he said.

And he made a pointed reference to the Arctic, which, with its bounteous energy reserves and thawing waterways, is emerging as a potential new point of conflict between Russia and its western rivals. "Our interests are concentrated in the Arctic. And of course we should pay more attention to issues of development of the Arctic and the strengthening of our position," he said.

Nato ambassadors emerged on Friday morning to accuse Russia of a "blatant violation" of Ukraine's sovereignty.

"Despite Moscow's hollow denials, it is now clear that Russian troops and equipment have illegally crossed the border into eastern and south-eastern Ukraine," its secretary general, Anders Fogh Rasmussen, said. A minor incident later blew up in central Europe when a plane carrying the Russian defence minister, Sergei Shoigu, was apparently denied permission to travel through Polish airspace.

The conflict escalated this week when Ukraine accused Russia of helping separatists open up a second front in the far south-east, near the coastal city of Mariupol. Rebels overran the nearby town of Novoazovsk, close to the Russian border, and local Ukrainian defence units said the men involved had crossed from Russia and appeared to include regular Russian troops.

The ultimate goal of the Russian movements remain unclear; some believe a full-on advance towards Mariupol could be in the offing, while others suggest the increased activity is aimed at changing the facts on the ground and ensuring that a long-term "frozen conflict" situation emerges in the region, such that Kiev can never win back full control.

At Mariupol airport, Captain Ruslan Muzychuk said forces were "preparing to defend the city" from a potential attack, stating it was "one of the most important places for Ukraine to control". He said he believed the forces that had seized Novoazovsk included regular Russian soldiers. Armoured vehicles, pick-up trucks and civilian cars filled with fighters poured in and out, in a sign of the improvised nature of much of the Ukrainian military effort.

At a sport school in Mariupol that has been turned into a base for the Azov battalion, a volunteer unit that has drawn criticism for its far-right links but is fighting with the Ukrainian army, one of the commanders said he believed his men were now at war with the Russian army.

"From the way they look it is clear they are different to the separatist fighters," said the commander, who gave his nom de guerre, Kirt. He said his battalion were having to fight without heavy weaponry or armoured vehicles. They have been promised reinforcements and new equipment repeatedly by Kiev, he said, but the government does not deliver.

94 comments:

My family escaped from Kiev in 1918, back then and until just recently we called it "Russia".

Most of the family that didn't come to America or that went to Israel at that time? Ended up murdered by the Nazis with a lot of help from the Ukrainians.

Of course, life under the Czar was no picnic either. The Jews of Russia for a long time were treated as literal enemies of the state.

That all being said, As ISIS/ISIL murder thousands and thousands of Syrians and Syrians murder hundreds of thousands of Sunnis, it reminds me that Ukrainians are murdering Russians and Russians are murdering Ukrainians. But then again, Russians murdered moslems, the chechnya, the poles, the Latvians, the Lithuanians, the Bulgarians, the Georgians, the Germans, the Jews, Yugoslavs, and a broad other folks, not to mention the tens of millions that Stalin starved to death on purpose...

Joseph Stalin, leader of the Soviet Union, set in motion events designed to cause a famine in the Ukraine to destroy the people there seeking independence from his rule. As a result, an estimated 7,000,000 persons perished in this farming area, known as the breadbasket of Europe, with the people deprived of the food they had grown with their own hands.

"Joseph Stalin, leader of the Soviet Union, set in motion events designed to cause a famine in the Ukraine to destroy the people there seeking independence from his rule. As a result, an estimated 7,000,000 persons perished in this farming area, known as the breadbasket of Europe, with the people deprived of the food they had grown with their own hands."

Joseph Stalin, leader of the Soviet Union, set in motion events designed to cause a famine in the Ukraine to destroy the people there seeking independence from his rule. As a result, an estimated 7,000,000 persons perished in this farming area, known as the breadbasket of Europe, with the people deprived of the food they had grown with their own hands.

Hmm...nothing seems to have changed: Stalin murdered millions of Kulaks. through starvation and gunfire. The majority of civilians killed during Hitler's invasion of the Soviet were Ukrainians. They could not win for losing.

Hitler's racialism missed the chance to recruit Kulak military units and paramilitaries to fight against the hated Stalin. They did prove useful in rounding up and murdering Jews, however.

In a fascinating lecture at a Tel Aviv University convention this week, Dr. Halfin described the waves of soviet terror as a "carnival of mass murder," "fantasy of purges", and "essianism of evil."

Turns out that Jews too, when they become captivated by messianic ideology, can become great murderers, among the greatest known by modern history.

The Jews active in official communist terror apparatuses (In the Soviet Union and abroad) and who at times led them, did not do this, obviously, as Jews, but rather, as Stalinists, communists, and "Soviet people." Therefore, we find it easy to ignore their origin and "play dumb": What do we have to do with them? But let's not forget them.

My own view is different. I find it unacceptable that a person will be considered a member of the Jewish people when he does great things, but not considered part of our people when he does amazingly despicable things.

Even if we deny it, we cannot escape the Jewishness of "our hangmen," who served the Red Terror with loyalty and dedication from its establishment.....- Sever Plocker

Wrong! They were far to intelligent and educated to so serve as menial hangmen. They were the leaders. You just lack the mental acuity to understand that when everything else is placed aside, a Jew is a Jew by an accident of birth or a Jew by choice. When you are capable of making that fundamental distinction, you will have taken one baby-step toward an understanding of Judaism (Zionism)/

Since the US and Canada have heatedly argued over development rights and the Russians claimed those as well, it looks like Putin is putting more pressure on the West. He does seem intent on expanding Mother Russia back into her trousseau.

It is fifty years since I transferred from Ernest Harmon AFB in Newfoundland to the SAC B-52 base at Goose Bay Labrador. I find it unbelievable that fifty years later I am posting on a blog, news about a current Russian military threat in Europe and Russia is threatening about the Arctic. If you ever spent a winter at Goose, your visceral reaction would be to let them have it.

The valkyrie of the Democratic Party says she urged President Obama to do more to aid Syrian rebels years ago. And last summer, she supported air strikes on Bashar Assad’s regime.

Had we followed her advice and crippled Assad’s army, ISIS might be in Damascus today, butchering Christians and Alawites and aiding the Islamic State in Iraq in overrunning Baghdad.

But if the folly of attacking Assad’s army and weakening its resistance to ISIS terrorists is apparent to everyone this summer, why were Clinton, Obama and Secretary of State Kerry oblivious to this reality just a year ago?

Consider the rest of Hillary’s record. Her most crucial decision as Senator came in 2002 when she voted to invade Iraq. She now concedes it was the greatest mistake of her Senate career.

She voted against the surge in 2006, but confided to Defense Secretary Bob Gates that she did so to maintain her political viability for 2008.

This is statesmanship? Not voting your convictions about what is best for your country at war, so as not to antagonize the liberals in the Iowa caucuses?

In 2009, Hillary presented a “reset button” to Vladimir Putin’s foreign minister. In 2011, she supported U.S. air strikes to bring down Col. Gadhafi and celebrated in Tripoli when he was overthrown and lynched.

How did that work out? Libya is today a hellhole of murder and mayhem and Islamists are threatening a takeover.

Who did Hillary think would rise when Gadhafi fell?

Hillary’s failure to anticipate or prevent the Benghazi massacre and her role in the botched cover-up, all concede, are burdens she will carry into the primaries in 2016, should she run.{...}

Where, then, has Hillary exhibited the acumen to suggest she would be a wise and savvy steward of U.S. foreign policy in a disintegrating world?

Is this a convincing argument for the Republican alternative?

Hardly. The principal GOP voices on foreign policy, who get more airtime than Wolf Blitzer, are John McCain and Lindsey Graham.

Their track record: McCain wanted to confront Putin over South Ossetia. He and Graham wanted to arm Ukrainians to fight the Russians in Crimea, Luhansk and Donetsk. They wanted Moldova, Ukraine and Georgia brought into NATO, so that if war were to break out, we would be fighting the Russians alongside them.

This year, Graham was trolling around a Senate resolution to give Obama a blank check to attack Iran.

Last year, McCain and Graham were for attacking Assad’s army. This year they are for bombing ISIS, which is attacking Assad’s army.

But if Hillary, McCain and Graham have been repeatedly wrong about Syria, what do we now? Answer: Stop and think.

First, this war in Syria and Iraq, like all such wars, is eventually going to be won by soldiers, by boots on the ground, by troops who can take and hold territory. And in such wars, as Napoleon said, God is on the side of the big battalions.

America should declare to friends and allies in the Middle East, as Nixon did to our friends and allies in Asia in the Guam Doctrine of 1969, that while we will stand with them when they are attacked, they, not we, will provide the soldiers for their own defense.

No nation is less threatened by ISIS than ours. And as the Syrians, Turks, Kurds and Iraqis have the proximity and manpower to defeat ISIS, they should do this job themselves.

Turkey shares a 550-mile border with Syria and could march in and crush ISIS. But if President Recep Tayyip Erdogan wishes to play games with ISIS, out of hatred of Assad, let him and the Turks live with the consequences.

As for Syria’s army and regime, which either defeats ISIS or dies, let us cease impeding their efforts by backing a Free Syrian Army that has rarely won a battle and is only bleeding the Syrian army.

Kurdistan and its ethnic cousins in Syria, Turkey and Iran are capable of defending themselves, and we should encourage any nation, including Iran, that is willing to send them the weapons to fight ISIS.

As for Baghdad, if it wants its Sunni lands back, it either should fight for them or accept their loss. We Americans are living today with the consequences, in considerable losses of blood and treasure, of fighting other people’s wars in Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya.

Yet, we are suffering not at all from having kept out of other people’s wars — in Georgia, Crimea, Donetsk, Syria and Iran.

Speaking of the debate over U.S. air strikes in Syria, the New York Times writes, “There are too many unanswered questions to make that decision now, and there has been far too little public discussion for Mr. Obama to expect Americans to rally behind what could be another costly military commitment.”

...nearly forgot...The French may be a little bit tardy; they do have to complete the sale of those ships to Vlad. In looking at the Italians, it might be better to have them join Vlad first and do their customary mid-war change of allegiance. As for the Dutch, well, just keep doing what you do at Keukenhof.

Sound a lot like the "Rat Doctrine"Provide Close Air Support to Local Forces

America should declare to friends and allies in the Middle East, as Nixon did to our friends and allies in Asia in the Guam Doctrine of 1969, that while we will stand with them when they are attacked, they, not we, will provide the soldiers for their own defense.

No nation is less threatened by ISIS than ours. And as the Syrians, Turks, Kurds and Iraqis have the proximity and manpower to defeat ISIS, they should do this job themselves.

Turkey shares a 550-mile border with Syria and could march in and crush ISIS. But if President Recep Tayyip Erdogan wishes to play games with ISIS, out of hatred of Assad, let him and the Turks live with the consequences.

As for Syria’s army and regime, which either defeats ISIS or dies, let us cease impeding their efforts by backing a Free Syrian Army that has rarely won a battle and is only bleeding the Syrian army.

With a fleet of UAVs. Hellfire equipped Predator drones, over the battle space, the US can supply tactical close air support, providing a technological edge to our allies, without endangering a single US soldier.

Nixon's promise of support without US troops is now a tactical reality...

We are not about to send American boys 9 or 10 thousand miles away from home to do what Asian boys ought to be doing for themselves. - Lyndon B. Johnson.

Fair is fair. If the US should back off, it should back off everywhere. Otherwise, jihadists and brownshirts will get the idea that there is one international standard for everyone but Israel. That would be unChristian of the righteous Mr. Buchanan.

Your reasoning is faulty, allen, with regards to Lebanon. If Israel does not respect the border, then the US should be there, bringing Hellfire down on the invading forces, in support of the Lebanese government.

In 2009, Hillary presented a “reset button” to Vladimir Putin’s foreign minister. In 2011, she supported U.S. air strikes to bring down Col. Gadhafi and celebrated in Tripoli when he was overthrown and lynched.

How did that work out? Libya is today a hellhole of murder and mayhem and Islamists are threatening a takeover.

The results are in line with US national interests. Colonel Q and his regime were terrorists. They had previously targeted "Western" targets, US bound civilian aircraft, discotheques in Germany and Italian politicians. They were in negotiations with the Russians to provide a naval base capability to the Russian Navy.

Aug. 18, 2014 10:25 a.m. ET

LONDON—Libya's production has jumped to 550,000 barrels a day, state-owned National Oil Co. said Monday, as production ramps up at fields across the country.

The recovery of Libya's oil sector is in contrast with continuous fighting between militias in the capital of Tripoli—which is far from Libyan oil fields.

NOC spokesman Mohamed el-Harari said Libya is now producing 550,000 barrels a day, compared with 400,000 barrels a day last week. The number remains less than half the country's production capacity of about 1.6 million barrels a day.

As are the battles in Syria and Iraq, Egypt and Israel...Sudan and Nigeria... Kenya and Somalia.

In Iraq and Syria, against the ISIS, as soon as the local forces are ready to move forward, the US should support them, from the air.Whether those forces are Iraqi, Jordanian, Lebanese, Turkish or Syrian.

<><><>ISIS therefore looks like a major black operation directly manipulated by the neo-Ottoman fascists of Turkey, financed by tiny but superrich oil sheikhdoms like Qatar, and backed, behind the scenes by John Brennan’s CIA. This is not dissimilar from the CIA strategy in Nicaragua against the Sandinistas, or CIA recruitment of Laotian tribes during the Vietnam War. The great difference is that Vietnam was backed by a major US and Western consensus that Soviet and Chinese imperialism had to be stopped in buffer states like South Vietnam and South Korea. We felt a strong moral imperative to stop the mass-killing regimes spread by Soviet ideology in Cambodia, North Vietnam, North Korea, Mao’s China, Eastern Europe, and in the Soviet Union itself.

>>>>I do not believe this happened by accident. I think it could be an operation with tacit CIA support, in active collusion with the Muslim Brotherhood, financed by the billionaire sheikhdoms of the Arabian Peninsula like Qatar, Doha, UAE, and some Saudi billionaires off their dog chains. Turkey is clearly a major enabler.

If you think the CIA would never collude with the primitive head choppers of ISIS, consider what John Brennan and Obama have already done. In Benghazi we now know the CIA colluded with Al Qaida gangs in Libya and Syria to smuggle advanced weapons from Gadhafi’’s huge stockpile to the Sunni rebels in Syria, the precursors of ISIS. In Afghanistan, Obama is negotiating to surrender to the throwback Taliban. In Egypt BHO tried to turn the country over to the sadistic Muslim Brotherhood, the same people who assassinated Anwar Sadat the peacemaker forty years ago -- and who haven’t changed one little bit since then.

It is a perverse strategy of this weird administration to flip sides: From the Bush-Cheney strategy of trying to stop mullahs with nukes, the US has turned into a cynical enabler of Iranian aggression. From a supporter of Israel, we are colluding with the superrich but tiny oil regime of Qatar to pay for Hamas and its ilk to attack civilians in Israel. Flipping sides and stabbing allies in the back is what BHO does best: Consider how he got the Democrat nomination by tarring Bill and Hillary as racists. In Alinsky language, this is “acting outside the experience of the enemy” -- the American middle class. Obama does it every day, in every way. Backstabbing allies works, according to this doctrine, because the “enemy” never expects it, can’t even recognize it when it happens, and has no prepared weapons to fight it. It is also treacherous and often evil, but that doesn’t stop these folks.

If this hypothesis is correct, what is Obama’s purpose with the CIA-Qatar-Turkey tacit backing of ISIS?

For my wayward and silly shit young 'nephew' Ashlikins, in the spirit of Aristotle's NIcomachean Ethics -

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicomachean_Ethics

- in the hopes that it will help him live long and live well -

Mob Rule and Free Stuff from Athens to Obama

August 29, 2014 by Daniel Greenfield 26 Comments

Daniel Greenfield, a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the Freedom Center, is a New York writer focusing on radical Islam. He is completing a book on the international challenges America faces in the 21st century.

democracys_dangers_and_discontent_coverThe David Horowitz Freedom Center will be hosting an evening with Bruce Thornton in Los Angeles on Wednesday, Sept. 3, 2014. For more information, click here.

21st century Americans have come to take democracy for granted as one of the comforts of modern life, like electricity or plastic, a thing that exists unconsidered as the foundation of their convenience. You hit a light switch and the light turns on. You push a button and politicians carry out your will.

The wars of the last century were defined as wars for democracy and the wars of this century have also been fitted into that mold, becoming not wars against external enemies, but wars for the assertion of the popular will of the peoples of Afghanistan and Iraq. All wars have become wars of democracy.

Internally however democracy has degenerated into billion dollar elections fought with armies of consultants, polling firms and volunteers who expertly divide and conquer the populace through their infinite identity politics subdivisions on behalf of the wealthiest men in the country fighting to preserve and promote their status quo of a powerful central government and its oligarchic corporations.

The ruling left vocally demands that its leader fulfill their demands by violating the Constitution. They assert that since he won the popular vote in two elections, he can disregard the mere process of ancient laws. Democracy trumps republic just as the Democratic Party trumps the Republican Party.

It is this political climate of Obamaphones and attack ads, free stuff and mob rule, that Bruce Thornton enters with his new book, Democracy’s Dangers and Discontents. Thornton sees a country that has tilted too far toward the populism of the voting booth and too far away from the structure of a republic. Our collision of tyranny and greed has come from the mangling of a carefully constructed lawful structure.

Freedom requires firewalls, not only against the direct power of government, but also against the indirect power of the popular vote through government on the freedom of the individual. We need defenses not only against the tyranny of a tyrant, but also against the tyranny of King Mob.

The American system created firewalls against tyranny by limiting the power of any individual, in or out of politics, to influence the system. Not only did the branches of government have to be set against each other, but the popular vote could not be allowed to so thoroughly control the system that it would become a slave to the popular will and in turn enslave every individual to the latest poll and trending topic. As America has weakened its structural defenses, it has enslaved the individual to the group.

In Democracy’s Dangers and Discontents, Bruce Thornton traces the weaknesses of democracy from Athens to the modern revivals of democracy and the imbalances of power that they manufacture. Thornton suggests that the challenges raised by the critics of Athenian democracy remain unanswered and that those unanswered questions continue to haunt our system of government today..............

bob, are you at all capable of making your own argument? You copy and paste crap from all over and somehow think you are presenting a coherent argument.

Sure, 'mob rule' is a noted problem with democracy. Yes, a simple democratic system where everything is premised on 50+1 plebiscites would not be a good thing. Even if such a democracy were to be instituted you haven't stated why a Military dictatorship would be a better organizing principle for the society.

Yes Democracy has problems but there is the old saw 'it is a crappy system but it is still better than all the rest'. In Egypt the MB won the elections, ruled for a short while and then the military staged a coup. You have stated that this a good thing because of "Sharia" and Hitler was elected, and now, Democracy has problems.

you go b00b!

Where you, perchance, bullied when a youngster in school? I'm guessing - yeah.

Rat-Bob throws up an article that describes many of the problems facing the US today but it ignores the biggest problem we face which is the exact opposite of the one highlighted in the article, we have become a kleptocracy with affairs managed for and assets doled out to a select few by ministers bought and paid for by those same elites, the people savvy enough to bend the system to their advantage.

You hit a light switch and the light turns on. You push a button and politicians carry out your will.

Jeddah (Saudi Arabia) (AFP) - King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia has warned that the West will be the next target of the jihadists sweeping through Syria and Iraq, unless there is "rapid" action.

Related Stories

US urges global 'coalition' to fight IS jihadists AFP Saudi king warns of terrorism threat to U.S., Europe Reuters Islamic State 'beyond anything we've seen': US AFP Islamic State vows to 'break the American cross' Reuters U.S. Considering Taking Fight Against Islamic State Into Syria Huffington Post

"If we ignore them, I am sure they will reach Europe in a month and America in another month," he said in remarks quoted on Saturday by Asharq al-Awsat daily and Saudi-backed Al-Arabiya television station.

"Terrorism knows no border and its danger could affect several countries outside the Middle East," said the king who was speaking at a welcoming ceremony on Friday for new ambassadors, including a new envoy from Saudi ally the United States.

The Islamic State (IS) jihadist group has prompted widespread concern as it advances in both Syria and Iraq, killing hundreds of people, including in gruesome beheadings and mass executions.

Lack of action would be "unacceptable" in the face of the phenomenon, King Abdullah said.

"You see how they (jihadists) carry out beheadings and make children show the severed heads in the street," he said, condemning the "cruelty" of such acts.

"It is no secret to you, what they have done and what they have yet to do. I ask you to transmit this message to your leaders: 'Fight terrorism with force, reason and (necessary) speed'."

President Barack Obama has yet to decide whether the United States should launch raids against positions held by the Islamic State jihadist group in Syria to follow US air strikes on IS activities in Iraq.

US Secretary of State John Kerry called Friday for a global coalition to combat Islamic State fighters' "genocidal agenda".

Writing in the New York Times, Kerry said he and Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel will meet European counterparts on the sidelines of a NATO summit in Wales next week, to enlist assistance.

They will then travel on to the Middle East to build support "among the countries that are most directly threatened".

"With a united response led by the United States and the broadest possible coalition of nations, the cancer of ISIS will not be allowed to spread to other countries," Kerry said in Friday's op-ed piece.

Asharq Al-Awsat said the king urged other countries to join the UN Counter-Terrorism Centre, set up in 2011 to respond to new threats, and to which Saudi Arabia has made a grant of $100 million.

The best solution for the Russian problem is for the EU to rapidly decrease the purchasing of Russian oil and gas. That could be done in significant measured amounts but the oil would have to come form areas falling under the control of ISIS.

Bill O’Reilly is a horse’s ass. A horse has a head and an ass as an economic activity has a buyer and a seller. A Visa transactionaccommodates a purchase and a sale. Russia imports goods and sends back money. Idiot like O’Reilly export hot breath and little else.

Europe could continue to ramp up the use of alternative fuels but needs growing economies to do it. Pumping money into the banking system at ridiculously low rates does not seem to be working. I want to suggest an idea that I have favored for sometime that I believe would solve this problem.

Simply stated, all energy substitution projects could be financed using special Euro issues that are project related. Assume a massive increase in fracking, coal gassification, small ethanol refineries and car electrification based on new electrical generation projects, military infrastructure and associated manufacturing to support these projects.

The EUCB would match each project budget with a project special issue of currency. All project related costs for material and labor would be paid with this currency, all new issue, none borrowed. The money would be issued commensurate with the economic activity produced by the project. This would have to be very strictly monitored to work. It has the beauty of the issuance of the cash would directly relate to increase in jobs and purchase and ceases when the project is complete.

A model would be created by economic analysis that would conservatively predict the the future cash stream generated by the project and its depreciated economic life and the special project issued currency would be withdrawn and retired over time based on the economics of the project.

The withdrawal would not necessarily be deflationary as there would alway be new projects with new project related currency issued to pay for each new project.

NATO wants member countries to ramp up spending to 2% of GDP. The US currently spends about 2% of GDP on the military as does, I think, a few other smaller NATO members. Canada spends about 1% yet the current Canadian government has been very loud and strident in condemning Russia's actions in the Ukraine but doing very little. There is speculation here that the current government is talking for votes as there is a large number of Ukrainian immigrants. The Jewish vote is very strong as well and, yep, the current government is a loud supporter of all things Israel.

The Canadian government under Harper has deviated from it's long time traditional role of neutral peace keeper to advocate of particular foreign countries positions in conflicts.

This does not include many military-related items that are outside of the Defense Department budget, such as nuclear weapons research, maintenance, cleanup, and production, which is in the Department of Energy budget, Veterans Affairs, the Treasury Department's payments in pensions to military retirees and widows and their families, interest on debt incurred in past wars, or State Department financing of foreign arms sales and militarily-related development assistance. Neither does it include defense spending that is not military in nature, such as the Department of Homeland Security, counter-terrorism spending by the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and intelligence-gathering spending by NASA.

PARIS: French President Francois Hollande said on Saturday (Aug 30) that EU leaders meeting in Brussels were likely to boost sanctions on Russia over the escalating Ukraine conflict. "Sanctions will be no doubt increased and the (European) Commission will have to work on" implementing this, Hollande told reporters after a meeting of centre-left leaders in Paris.

The Ukraine crisis is "the biggest crisis since the end of the Cold War", said Hollande."It's close to Europe. It's on the border of Europe ... What is happening concerns Europe directly. Not just Europe, the whole world, but especially Europe,"

The United States should also supply significant and immediate military assistance to both the Kurdish pesh merga and the Iraqi security forces, thus opening up a two-front war for the Islamic State. I suspect their resources, when stretched, will appear and be far less formidable. We should also utilize our cyber capabilities to go after their command and control, which runs on email and social networks. Lastly, there is a clear need for U.S. airstrikes in both Iraq and Syria, and these should be increased in their frequency and lethality.

James Stavridis, a retired Navy admiral, is dean of the Fletcher School at Tufts University.

Justin McCarthy, a professor of history at the University of Louisville, writing in his Annotated Map, “Forced Migration and Mortality in the Ottoman Empire,” also notes that there were about five million Muslims displaced due to the Austro-Hungarian occupation of Bosnia-Herzegovina, the Crimean War, Balkan wars, the Turkish war of independence and World War I.Sergio DellaPergola, from the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, in his paper “Demography in Israel/Palestine: Trends, Prospects and Policy Implications,” provides estimates of the population of Palestine in different periods. As the demographic data below shows, most Muslims living in Palestine in 1948 when the State of Israel was created had been living there for fewer than 60 years:1890: Arab Population 432,0001947: Arab Population 1,181,000Growth in Arab population from 1890 to 1947: 800,000

By 1890, still before any significant Jewish immigration, the population had made a slightly larger jump, to 532,000. ...According to British investigations, there were 689,275 persons in Palestine in 1915, about 590,000 of whom were Arab

This would mean that Christians and Jews made up the balance, aprox. 100,000 people.

By 1922, however, just three years later, the Arab population had increased by 80,000 above the 1919 level. After the War had ended and Britain had taken formal control of the area (with the collapse of the Ottoman Empire), Arab population rates recovered quickly and significantly. Many Arabs took advantage of the improved economic conditions that resulted from British administration; and by 1922, the population of Haifa—which had declined by 30% from 1915 to 1917 due to Ottoman expulsions—had become greater than it was before the war.... there were in fact between 1.2 and 1.3 million Arabs in all of Palestine by 1947

In 1922 there were 84,000 Jews in Palestine, rising to 640,000 in 1947.These were people with NO ties to the land, not even sixty years.These European immigrants had less claim to the land, to sovereignty, than the people who had been there, for sixty years.

Majid Rafizadeh, an Iranian-American political scientist and scholar, is president of the International American Council and serves on the board of the Harvard International Review at Harvard University. Rafizadeh is also a senior fellow at the Nonviolence International Organization based in Washington, DC and is a member of the Gulf project at Columbia University.

IRAN-WOMEN-DEMORecently, Majlis (Iranian parliament), which is dominated by hardliners, has voted to ban vasectomies, permanent kinds of contraception, and impose restriction on women’s fertility. In addition, the bill bans advertisements aimed at promoting birth control. Any doctor, or woman, who violates the ban will be punished and prosecuted according to the new Islamist bill.

Since its establishment, the Islamic Republic has significantly exercised “biopower” (a term coined by the historian Michel Foucault) in order to control the population and particularly subjugate women to achieve the regime’s Islamist, religious, ideological, political, and economic objectives. According to Foucault, biopower is defined in The History of Sexuality as “an explosion of numerous and diverse techniques for achieving the subjugations of bodies and the control of populations.”

Under the new Islamist state, the Ayatollahs and ruling clerics utilized methods in order to control and exercise power over women to gradually take away their capacity to act in social affairs particularly by regulating their day to day activities, monitoring all their actions, as well as by having authority over their bodies.

For example, dress codes including (scarves, chador, etc) were imposed on women. Women could not wear what they desired out of the home. Women were encouraged to cover their bodies and dress more conservatively. And those who did not comply were laid off from work, fined, lashed, arrested, imprisoned, and attacked.

In addition, women’s bodies were predominantly defined by the Islamic Republic as a platform for satisfying their spouses. Women were banned from playing several sports. Instead, being a housewife and submissive was encouraged. The control of women’s bodies and their day-to-day activities were used as a formidable venue to subjugate, dehumanize, and sway women’s capacity in life.

On the other hand, what are the underlying reasons for the new restriction on women’s fertility under the Islamic law of Iran?

The fundamental reasons are political, ideological and religion-driven. The whole process of passing a bill to impose restriction on women’s fertility began by one man’s plan: Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. The Supreme Leader has the final say as well as the power to delineate general policies for the entire country after consultation with the Nation’s Exigency Council, according to article 110 of the Islamic Republic.

The Supreme Leader decided that he wanted the population of his country to increase from 75 million people to 150 million. Khamenei’s new doctrine was read out to the nationwide conference in the city of Qum, pointing out that “I believe that our country is not a country of 75 million people, our country [could be] a country of 150 million people… and even more… a young image is an essential and important issue for the country, and the countries which have faced aging population have overcome the issue in a difficult way. ”

The message added, “We always wonder how life is going to be if we have four or five children; we should also think that if we have four or five children and if they are able to find jobs they will contribute to the development of the country.” In addition, the Supreme Leader introduced a 14-point plan to increase the population.

The Iranian regime carried out the same policy in the 1980s, encouraging larger families and more children during the Iran-Iraq war. Iran’s population reached its peak during that time.

On the other hand, the new Islamist bill is aimed at pushing women in the Islamic Republic to be housewives and take traditional roles as mothers rather than participate in public political and social affairs. Currently, large numbers of Iranian women are highly educated and seeking more public functions in the society.

Across the country, billboards that promote less children have been replaced by mottos such as “A single blossom is not spring” and “More children, better lives.” The Supreme Leader states rhetorically that doubling the number of the population will “strengthen national identity” as well as counter “undesirable aspects of Western lifestyles.”

Nevertheless, politically speaking, the population of a country can be regarded as a defining character for the political strength of that government. The new bill will purportedly double the population of Shia Muslims, providing further manpower for the Islamic Republic and strengthening its political influence, national security. The Iranian regime will be able to have mandatory military service and hire a considerable amount of young people in its army and militia groups such as Basij by offering them incentives such as educational fellowships, loans, etc. From the Ayatollahs and ruling political figures in the Islamic Republic, this move will ensure their hold on power in the future.

However, many policies have unintended consequences as well. This restriction on women might have a backlash. It is questionable whether educated Iranian women will accept going back and being confined in homes as mothers and housewives. Secondly, the increase in population might lead to a larger discontent and disaffected population, which would pose greater risks in the future in case protests against the Iranian regime erupt, as they did in 2009. Controlling a larger dissatisfied population poses more challenges.

Obama's 'no strategy' gaffe may become the 'read my lips' signature of a failed presidency

By Thomas Lifson

Let’s cut President Obama some slack. Golf is a challenging game, and he has been focused like a laser (as Bill Clinton used to say) on improving his game on Martha’s Vineyard, and there’s only so much a guy can do. Coming up with a strategy for dealing with guys who are the junior varsity can wait – and after all there are three fundraisers and a wedding beckoning this holiday weekend, so what’s the hurry?

Unfortunately for any residual desire of President Obama’s desire to be seen as a serous leader, the above sarcastic apologia fits his pattern of behavior in office like a proverbial glove. He has already established himself as a man who dithers when important decisions loom, and his devotion to fun and games and fundraising is far more characteristic in the public eye than any seriousness about the weighty responsibilities of his office. In foreign policy, he has been reactive, with no clear positive goals for the United States. Even Hillary Clinton has gone on the record saying that “Don’t do stupid s*#t” is not an adequate vision.

For those who have not been paying attention to the news: yesterday, speaking without a teleprompter at a pre-Labor Day weekend press conference, committed a classic Washington gaffe, accidentally telling the truth. Responding to a question on whether he would seek Congressional approval for action against ISIS in Syria, he admitted (full transcript here):

But I don't want to put the cart before the horse. We don't have a strategy yet. I think what I've seen in some of the news reports suggests that folks are getting a little further ahead of where we're at than we currently are. And I think that's not just my assessment, but the assessment of our military, as well. We need to make sure that we've got clear plans, that we're developing them. At that point, I will consult with Congress and make sure that their voices are heard.

Coming in the wake of an extended, golf-filled vacation on Martha’s Vineyard, the remark sounds like a 12 year old’s excuse for turning in his homework late. And the assignment was not something that came in last night, after all. Despite Obama’s dismissal of ISIS as the JV, it has been a problem for years. John Hinderaker of Powerline summarizes the history:

ISIL has claimed responsibility for bombing attacks in Iraq going back to 2010. The group has played a major role in the Syrian civil war since April 2013. In early June 2014, ISIL captured Mosul, Fallujah and Tikrit in northern Iraq, and threatened Baghdad. In this campaign, ISIL obtained large quantities of American weaponry and a great deal of money, making it the richest terrorist group in history. It also murdered hundreds of Christians and rendered many more refugees. In late June, ISIL announced the founding of a new caliphate. In July, ISIL carried out a series of mass executions. In early August, ISIL slaughtered large numbers of Yazidis and kidnapped 400 Yazidi women to sell as sex slaves. On August 8, the U.S. government labeled ISIL’s massacre of the Yazidi as genocide. On August 16, ISIL murdered 80 more Yazidis. On August 19, ISIL beheaded American journalist James Foley on video. The following day, President Obama took a brief break from golfing to denounce Foley’s murder. On August 21, Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel said that ISIL represents an “imminent” threat to American security.

We have the anniversary of 911 coming exactly 2 weeks after Obama’s “no strategy” declaration. Jihadists seem to love marking that date with actions against the United States, as they did two years ago in Benghazi. Now that hundreds, if not thousands, of European and US passport holders have been mobilized to fight for ISIS, it is not unthinkable that America will face a serious terror outbreak on that date. If, God forbid, that happens, “We have no strategy” will become the trademark descriptor of Obama’s presidency.

President Obama has now placed himself in an extraordinarily vulnerable position should ISIS act against the American people with its customary savagery. His arrogant dismissal of it with a sports metaphor, his admission of no strategy, and his track record of dithering and unseriousness combine to make his gaffe into what could become his politcal epitaph.

Magnificent Ronald and the Founding Fathers of al Qaeda

“These gentlemen are the moral equivalents of America’s founding fathers.” — Ronald Reagan while introducing the Mujahideen leaders to media on the White house lawns (1985). During Reagan’s 8 years in power, the CIA secretly sent billions of dollars of military aid to the mujahedeen in Afghanistan in a US-supported jihad against the Soviet Union. We repeated the insanity with ISIS against Syria.